On Monday 05 May 2014 17:47:32 Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> + dev->coherent_dma_mask = DMA_BIT_MASK(32);
> + if (!dev->dma_mask)
> + dev->dma_mask = &dev->coherent_dma_mask;
> +
> + /*
> + * if dma-ranges property doesn't exist - just return else
> + * setup the dma offset
> + */
> + ret = of_dma_get_range(dev->of_node, &dma_addr, &paddr, &size);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_dbg(dev, "no dma range information to setup\n");
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + /* DMA ranges found. Calculate and set dma_pfn_offset */
> + dev->dma_pfn_offset = PFN_DOWN(paddr - dma_addr);
> + dev_dbg(dev, "dma_pfn_offset(%#08lx)\n", dev->dma_pfn_offset);
> +}
I think there should at least be a comment about why we are computing
the correct DMA mask here and then ignore that and just use DMA_BIT_MASK(32)
instead. I understand that Russell and Rob prefer it that way and I'm not
going to argue, but I find it counterintuitive and I think it deserves
an explanation in the source code for anybody who is trying to figure
out how things fit together.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
